Blogs

Monarchy is Better than a Republic, Part XIX

16 October 2009

16 October 2009

At a town hall meeting in New Orleans yesterday, ABC News reports that:

President Obama, like any other President, has his fair share of critics. Even fourth-graders have noticed.

Why do people hate you?", a fourth-grade boy asked Obama at a town hall event in New Orleans today. "They’re supposed to love you. And God is love."

Obama’s answer is actually pretty reasonable. But this is what happens when you make a mere elected politician assume the status of Priest-King. It is, in its own way, a corrupting influence. I don’t blame the kid asking the question since, heck, there are plenty of professional journalists in DC who basically think along the same lines. This isn’t Obama’s fault, but it’s a problem nonetheless. Monarchy may not make much "sense" but it is at least a pragmatic solution that, these days, looks much better than an elected Chief Executive who is also Head of State.


More Spectator for less. Subscribe and receive 12 issues delivered for just £12, with full web and app access. Join us.

Show comments
  • rnd technologies

    Good view.

  • ndm

    Ideally I would much prefer a republic on the Swiss model where the people have far more input and the jobs of head of state or head of government are commensurately far less important.

    I suspect this preference has more to do with the fact that Switzerland is a small country about which no one knows much about politically other than it has “direct democracy.” The destruction wrought on the governance of California by its use of “direct democracy” should serve as a reminder of why it is, in fact, anti-democratic.

  • daniel maris

    Well yes – we are going to have an unelected head of state to rule over us, aren’t we?…some say Tony Blair is going to be appointed as President of the European Union of which we are or will soon be citizens.

    I certainly see the many advantages of constitutional monarchy but I am afraid that Prince Charles’s enthusiasm for extension of Shariah law has really dimmed my enthusiasm for monarchy. Ideally I would much prefer a republic on the Swiss model where the people have far more input and the jobs of head of state or head of government are commensurately far less important.

  • dearieme

    Yes, the Separation of Powers that the FFs overlooked was that between the CEO and the Chairman – but then so do most modern US Corporations, don’t they?

  • ndm

    You never asked that question when Bush was in charge

    The problems inherent to one person being simultaneously Head of State and Chief Executive came up frequently during the Bush Administration – particularly with regard to Administration accusations and allusions of anti-Americanism among those who disagreed with its policies.

  • Rhoda Klapp

    You never asked that question when Bush was in charge. The media and some of the folks have made Obama an icon.

  • Edmund Jerk

    Come on! Look at other European Republics: they don’t worship their elected leaders. Or worship anything if you believe the statistics of church attendance. Could you imagine a French schoolboy asking the same question to Sarkozy?

    I’m still not sure whether a Republic would be any better than what we have now, and not swayed by the Lefty republican arguments from Hari & co. Though Bill Emmott, the non-Lefty classic-liberal, is pretty convincing here: http://www.billemmott.com/article.php?id=32

  • Noa Zrk

    “Monarchy may not make much “sense” but it is at least a pragmatic solution that, these days, looks much better than an elected Chief Executive who is also Head of State”.
    Oh come on Alex! What is the point this gratuitous remark, entirely unrelated as it is to the preceding story? At least the Yanks can vote Obama out in a little over for years if they don’t care for his depredations. We’re stuck forever with the useless and ludicrously benefits subsidised, jam producing, helicopter hijacking congenital retards who are conspicuously insulated from anything approaching the real world with wads of our cash. I can only conclude you are taking the first sycophantic steps on your inexorable path to future ennoblement and a seat in the Lords.

  • Noa Zrk

    Really Alex? And what use has our constitutional monarchy proved to have been in contesting the systemic attacks on democracy conducted by this wretched government? How many bills unsigned? who many MPs unknighted and Labour placemen not ennobled or disrobed for their corruption? It seems the monarchy’s sole remaining function is to take the Taxpayers pound in exchange for its silent complicity in the degradation and destruction of our democracy. Unless, that is we count PoW’s belligerent criticism of the proposed Chelsea Barrack development as the Royals contribution to the defence of liberty.

  • Dirty Euro

    Would your argument also not be an argument for a communist dictator as our head of state too, or an unelected communist head of state chosen by trade unions bosses? Some tories would say we have that already.
    Basically the right wing hate left wing leaders. The only thing they accept to stop that is that we always have right wing leaders who they expect us to bow down to a right wing monarchy ensures.
    I find an unelected head of state more unacceptable than an elected one I disagree with.

Close
Can't find your Web ID? Click here